●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load All Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
bywvmarle ( 1070040 ) writes:
we have partnered with 97 mobile carriers in 72 countries to provide access to Wikipedia to more than 800 million people free of mobile data charges.
These agreements ought to be illegal, and in many countries they would be (and rightfully so).
byMegol ( 3135005 ) writes:
Why?
The net neutrality problem is something completely different - that of Internet providers throttling traffic that they don't get extra money for (from the content provider).
This is people "paying" Internet providers so they will not charge users any money for some sponsored content.
The first thing fucks up the Internet - the other gives some people that wouldn't have any access the Internet at all access to some part of it.
It's not the same thing at all.
bywvmarle ( 1070040 ) writes:
To get Wikipedia on a data connection without data charges those people would have some mobile Internet device (e.g. a smartpone), and a mobile data connection, normally paid for already.
Now SOME providers in their country offer access to one web site (i.e. Wikipedia) for free (i.e. included in their data plan). Stopping this project, or cancelling existing such contracts, does not cut off those people from Wikipedia. It will just be included in their normal data charges - just like users of the other providers in the same country. Also why would it have to be limited to Wikipedia, and not also say the Encyclopedia Brittanica, and a few international news papers?
I don't see much difference with what is (used to be?) offered around my place for packages that include free access to WhatsApp and the mobile site of Facebook. I don't know if Facebook pays for that, actually I doubt it.
Net neutrality is about not giving preferred access to certain sites, or giving different rates (cost, speed) to access different sites using the same connection or being allowed to access certain sites at all. That is regardless of whether the site(s) in question pay for their preferred access.
Parent
twitter
facebook
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...